Rejection of complaint at pre-cognizance stage does not debar institution of second regular complaint for same incident

On the institution of written complaint regarding commission of a cognizable offence, Magistrate, at pre-cognizance stage, may direct to a concerned police station to register F.I.R. on the basis of facts narrated in the complaint if the commission of cognizable offence, disclosed prima facie and the investigating officer would conduct an investigation. Thus, Magistrate exercises a very limited power under S. 156(3) Cr.P.C. and so is its discretion. It does not travel into the arena of merit of the case if such case was fit to proceed further.

Whereas at post cognizance, Magistrate after taking cognizance, may adopt the procedure of complaint cases provided under Ss. 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. If the Magistrate is not satisfied with conclusions arrived at by the Investigating Officer in the report submitted under S. 173 Cr.P.C. then Magistrate may take cognizance upon original complaint sent to S.H.O. at the pre-cognizance stage and proceed further to examine the complaint under S. 200 Cr.P.C. and his witnesses under S. 202 Cr.P.C.

In genuine cases, if averments of the complainant are true and trustworthy or these are found so after preliminary inquiry, then Magistrate under S. 156(3) Cr.P.C. may direct S.H.O. to register F.I.R. and conduct an investigation on the basis of averments of complaint. The Magistrate has discretion at the pre-cognizance stage to direct concerned S.H.O. for registration of F.I.R. on basis of complaint instituted under S. 156(3) Cr.P.C. and investigate the matter.

It would be at the post-cognizance stage if Magistrate takes cognizance of the original complaint or after rejection at the pre-cognizance stage if a second complaint is filed by the complainant.

At the post cognizance stage, the complainant may institute regular complaint on basis of which, Special Judge, may record the statement of the complainant under S. 200 Cr.P.C. and evidence under S. 202 Cr.P.C. and proceed according to the law on the regular complaint if instituted by the complainant.

Rejection of a complaint at the pre-cognizance stage, therefore, does not debar the institution of the second regular complaint.

Appearing counsel: Anand Kumar Srivastava, Vivek Kumar Srivastava

Conviction under S. 411 IPC for dishonestly receiving stolen property is invalid when the accused persons are acquitted under S. 379 IPC for theft arising from the same transaction.

AIR 2025 SC 3890 : AIROnline 2025 SC 760 Legal principles "In a criminal prosecution, the initial burden is always on the prosecution to discharge.", "Conviction under Section 411 IPC requires that the property is proved to be stolen property.", "If the prosecution fails to establish

Benefit of maternity leave with allowance to Contractual employee

AIROnline 2022 KER 275 An educational society CPAS is an "establishment" under S. 2(1)(b) of Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, as the term covers any establishment under State law, not only commercial entities. Hence MB Act's applicable to contract employees in establishments like CPAS. Further

Legal Principles Regarding First Appeal S. 96 of Civil P C

AIROnline 2025 MAD 723 "Right of first appeal is a substantive, valuable right and not merely procedural.", "Unless expressly excluded by statute, the right of appeal cannot be limited or taken away by subsequent legislation.", "Appeal is a continuation of the suit.", "Judicial

Read next